Not aimed at you, but seriously?
by tar (2020-11-25 10:47:07)

In reply to: The UC game next year looks more and more interesting.  posted by G.K.Chesterton


Cincinnati? North Carolina? Any number of other putrid teams on our schedule that people are clutching their pearls over? These teams suck. If ND can’t curb stomp them, then ND isn’t really that good. There is little to be interested in with most of the weak ass teams on the schedule this year or in future years, save the occasional game against a decent team like Clemson.

Wisconsin in GB would have been intriguing for the novelty of a rare opponent in a hallowed venue.

I know Lou Holtz used to build up opponents, but it was his schtick. We should be more discerning and have higher expectations.






Don’t we play Ohio State/Clemson both in 22 and 23?
by athlete37  (2020-11-25 14:54:27)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I’ll give you 2021 is lacking, but ya kinda brush over our higher level opponents the next two years, which consist of 2 of the 3 best programs right now.


Yes
by HTownND  (2020-11-25 16:07:49)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Although every other game in 2022 is less than ideal outside of Cal and the standards

Marshall
Cal
Stanford
UNLV
Navy
USC
UNC
BC
Syracuse

2023 is
USC
Wake
Navy
Stanford
Duke
Louisville
NC State
Pitt

There are still some open slots in those years, but I'd be shocked if we get any big names. They feel like buy slots for us.

Those are some extremely top heavy schedules with a bunch of less than stellar programs underneath. Demand for OSU and Clemson tickets will be through the roof. The rest will be wide open for tickets.


Unfortunately for us, outside of Clemson, the ACC really sucks, and we are locked and loaded with them plus USC/Navy/Stanford.


Eh, complaining about 2022 and 2023 is at the margins
by KeoughCharles05  (2020-11-25 16:54:40)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Both years feature Clemson, Ohio State, and USC.

2022 especially spaces those games out nicely, with Ohio State leading off, Clemson in an early November showdown, and USC as the finale. The rest of the games don't much matter, but for what it's worth, I'd expect BC to finish the season ranked, and UNC to finish as a top 15 team then. But when you play 2 of the top 3 teams over the last decade, there's opportunities for great games/moments, and nothing that anyone can sneeze at when looking at a resume for playoff contention.

2023 shapes up just a little bit worse, with no season-capping game to speak of. It also doesn't appear as though any of the current filler will be particularly good. Might be a good year to reschedule the Wisconsin game...


I think UNC in Brown’s 4 year will be top 15 to 20, along
by athlete37  (2020-11-25 16:16:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

with USC. So that schedule may have teams ranked something along the lines of 2, 3, 16, and 16, which is pretty good if it holds. It kind of sucks that Stanford has fallen off the map a lot and that Cal is still down. Marshall is currently ranked but that’s not assured to continue in a regular season. I get what you’re saying, but he really brushed past Ohio State in saying “Clemson was a decent game but otherwise...”

In my opinion. That’s the equivalent of brushing past Alabama now.


“save the occasional game against a decent team...
by tar  (2020-11-25 18:45:00)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

like Clemson”

I didn’t brush past anyone and my point stands. We play a bunch of tomato cans a one or two decent teams. It’s far from the standard of excellence our best teams proved themselves against and the types of schedules our championship teams and coaches regularly faced.

I know I know. It’s not 1988 anymore...


Our 2022 schedule will be a top 5-10 SOS *
by athlete37  (2020-11-25 18:49:20)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


We'll see
by HTownND  (2020-11-25 18:54:21)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

There will be a lot of SEC schools above us, and it's possible Ohio State, by virtue of playing us, will also be there.

Our problem is the ACC sucks, outside of Clemson, and will continue to suck, which will drag us down.


And our traditional non ACC slate has also hit the shitter
by tar  (2020-11-25 21:04:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

USC can no longer be counted upon to be good.

Navy has always been a lose-lose

Stanford is weak

Now we’ve added bullshit buy games.

ND should never lose more than 1 game because they don’t play anybody good anymore.

Shwashbrack has stacked the deck for Kelly, and he still manages to trip over his own dick every year.

And people eat it up because “it’s the best we can do”


Pitt and Miami sucked for most of Ara's career
by ODSCHOOL  (2020-11-26 12:32:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

They were generally good for a 49-7 beat down


Shitter’s full *
by athlete37  (2020-11-26 12:00:33)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Shitter’s full *
by athlete37  (2020-11-26 10:08:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Clemson just "decent". Pleeeez! *
by Wolfetone  (2020-11-25 12:09:04)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


They haven’t beaten anyone good yet. *
by tar  (2020-11-25 14:02:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post